|From:||Andi Kleen <andi-AT-firstfloor.org>|
|To:||Linux Kernel <linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org>, svaidy-AT-linux.vnet.ibm.com|
|Subject:||Re: [RFC v1] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n|
|Date:||Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:49:01 +0200|
|Cc:||Suresh B Siddha <suresh.b.siddha-AT-intel.com>, Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi-AT-intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo-AT-elte.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra-AT-chello.nl>, Dipankar Sarma <dipankar-AT-in.ibm.com>, Balbir Singh <balbir-AT-linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Vatsa <vatsa-AT-linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Gautham R Shenoy <ego-AT-in.ibm.com>|
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <email@example.com> writes: > > The idea being proposed is to enhance the tunable with varied degrees > of consolidation that can work best for different workload > characteristics. echo 2 > /sys/.../sched_mc_power_savings could > enable more aggressive consolidation than the default. It would be better to fix the single power saving default to work better with bursty workloads too than to add more tunables. Tunables are basically "we give up, let's push the problem to the user" which is not nice. I suspect a lot of users won't even know if their workloads are bursty or not. Or they might have workloads which are both bursty and not bursty. Or did you try that and failed? -Andi
Copyright © 2008, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds